Agenda - 08-30-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

-2- 34 There is some experience with both full and partial delegations, and with memoranda of agreement between local governments and DEM that contemplate anything from designating local governments as DEM's "eyes and ears" to authorizing a local government to take all steps short of formal issuance of permits. From my conversations with DEM I judge that a local government which received a _full delegation the line permit program might have some discretion to broaden the administration of the program into the area of controlling taps for growth control. If it were brought to DEM's attention that the permit system were being administered_ in a manner inconsistent with DEM's practice, EMC could and might revoke the delegation or ^MOA. One technical consideration might affect a county's ability to obtain a permit delegation for lines that it did not own and control. Both the statutes and the rules authorize delegation of permit authority to local governments only for systems "in their ,utility service areas." GS 143 - 215.1(f) and 15A NCAC 2H, §, .0218(a). (3) Discharge Facilities Inconsistent with Local Zoning or Sub Re s The 1989 General Assembly responded to widespread complaints that package treatment plant permits were being issued contrary to strong local preferences by enacting legislation that required advertised public meetings on discharge permit applications (if requested), and that gave local governments some control through local zoning over the issuance of such permits. The provision concerning zoning and subdivision prohibits EMC approval of certain discharge permits if the city or county government having jurisdiction informs the Commission in writing that the discharge facility would be inconsistent with a local zoning or subdivision ordinance -- unless the EMC then determines that approval of the application "has statewide significance and is in the best interest of the state." GS 143- 215.1(c)(6). It should be noted that this provision applies only to "new non-municipal domestic wastewater discharge facilities." The effect of the 1989, amendment is to give local governments a measure of control through local zoning and subdivision ordinances over a limited class of discharge systems: non - municipal domestic discharging systems. It does not in it present form give similar local input to decisions on "municipal" discharge systems or decisions on non - discharge systems, such as sewer lines and taps. There is nothing to prevent future amendments, however, that could extend the coverage of the 1989 legislation to additional types of systems, or to apply it comprehensively to all of the water pollution control permit programs.